The Lowly Child-Care Worker
From the Wall Street Journal Jan 5, 2010 By Sue Shellenbarger
Most talk of child-care costs focuses on how much families have to pay — a tab that for many parents rivals the cost of the mortgage or groceries. Since 2000, child-care costs have been rising twice as fast as families’ median income and the average cost that parents paid for full-time care for a 4-year-old child in a center ranged from more than $4,050 in Mississippi to more than $13,150 a year in Massachusetts.
But a new survey reported in today’s WSJ underscores another harsh truth about child care – that it is also a costly and demanding profession for workers to enter. In a study comparing 200 occupations based on income, working environment, stress, physical demands and the job outlook, child-care workers rank in the lowly 186th spot — barely higher than taxi drivers, roofers and roustabouts. (My own profession, newspaper reporter, ranked even lower – at 188.) The study by CareerCast.com is based on data from the Labor Department and the Census Bureau, plus the researchers’ own expertise. The category, “child-care workers,” covers both day-care employees and nannies, essentially anyone who gets paid to care for infants and toddlers when parents are working or are otherwise unable to do so themselves.
The economics of child care have long been out of whack. Amid an absence of the government subsidies offered by some European nations, few U.S. parents can afford to pay the full cost of high-quality child care. This forces child-care centers to survive partly by cutting labor costs, driving trained, educated, skilled people to abandon the field.
Child-care center directors’ median annual pay is only $34,233, according to Payscale.com, and child-care workers themselves make only $23,437, barely exceeding the federal poverty threshold for a family of four. The mean hourly wage for child-care workers is $9.73 an hour, falling short of coatroom attendants and short-order cooks, and barely outpacing dishwashers and burger flippers, say child-care advocacy groups such as the Center for the Child care Workforce.
Yet numerous studies have shown that the core ingredient of high-quality child care is a child’s relationship with his or her teacher, a factor that is linked to higher teacher training and education. Higher pay tends to draw better trained, better educated teachers.
Advocacy groups say higher pay and bonuses for child-care workers are needed to keep good teachers. They argue that investing in child-care workers would yield a big long-term payoff in the form of better-adjusted, higher-achieving children. One Boston nonprofit says student loan forgiveness, tax credits and bonuses funded by public-private partnerships could help keep good child-care workers in the field. State-funded child-care workers in Michigan voted to form a union.
Opponents, however, say working in child care bears its own intrinsic rewards, and that neither parents nor their employers can afford to subsidize pay raises for child-care staff, with care already so costly.
Readers, do you think child-care workers should be paid higher wages, or would it take too much of a hit out of your pocket? Would you ever want to be a child-care worker?
| Topic | Replies | Likes | Views | Participants | Last Reply |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Job Networking Groups | 0 | 0 | 430 | ||
| Read: How to Write a Cover Letter (+ Samples) | 1 | 0 | 232 | ||
| Keep up to date with the latest ways to get better jobs faster | 0 | 0 | 210 |
I have always put my kids in daycare, and one of the big reasons is that overall, the quality and education of the teachers is higher than what I find with babysitters. And yet the pay is so still so low. There is always a problem with turnover. At the daycare where my older two went, it was common for teachers to work there for a couple of years, and then bolt to the K12 system where the pay was about double. The teachers who lasted longer tended to be women who had gone back to school for early childhood ed degrees, and who had husbands with high powered careers - so they liked having a job that gave them lots of free time. This is especially true at the Montessori school where my daughter goes. Virtually all of the teachers are there because the hours are good, there isn’t much stress, and they like small kids. Their husbands basically support them. I honestly think those are the only people you can get in childcare positions who are going to be longterm and stable.
If tthe government steps in, standards will decline even further. In my state, a single childcare worker can care for 8 (I think) five year olds, but a kindergarten teacher can have 30+ five year olds in a class, because childcare is funded by parents. The government is not willing or able to fund an 8:1 ratio in public schools, but is willing to legislate it for the same age children in childcare.
So its never going to be a very highly paid occupation because at certain levels of pay hordes of people would be wiling to do it-creating a glut and reducing pay.
Note to Moms: don’t be curt or snippy with the child care workers-they are caring for your most precious blessings; pay the fees early even-most of the schools run on a very thin profit margin.
Your kids must tell a lot fewer poop jokes than mine do.
NYC family seeks a French speaking Nanny/Personal Assistant. Bachelor Degree required & Must be Legal to work in the US (Citizen or Green Card)- We do not sponsor.
Must be fluent in French & English. Minimum 3-5 years experience working as a Nanny. Duties: General Childcare & Teaching children.
Strong computer skills and Personal Assistant duties required.
Schedule: Monday –Friday 8am-6pm – Salary $900-$1,100/week DOE.
Please send a professional resume with prior childcare experience as a Microsoft Word Attachment.
http://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/etc/2100388461.html
Meh - I think childcare is pretty labor-intensive. Also, what is more important than who takes care of your child? We pay our nanny pretty well and she deserves it. I don’t know what our daughter’s nursery school pays the staff, but I think they work awfully hard, too.
.A good French-speaking nanny can earn over $50,000 per year:
NYC family seeks a French speaking Nanny/Personal Assistant. Bachelor Degree required & Must be Legal to work in the US (Citizen or Green Card)- We do not sponsor.
Must be fluent in French & English. Minimum 3-5 years experience working as a Nanny. Duties: General Childcare & Teaching children.
Strong computer skills and Personal Assistant duties required.
Schedule: Monday –Friday 8am-6pm – Salary $900-$1,100/week DOE.
Please send a professional resume with prior childcare experience as a Microsoft Word Attachment. ”
Am I alone in thinking $50,000 isn’t all that much money for the work involved? Childcare, teaching, and personal assistance?
I’d assume in the 70’s and certainly in the 50s’ your typical SAHM didn’t spend hours a day on the floor engaging their child in intellectually stimulative and enriching play?
to generalize that every babysitter is on the phone or talkiing about polish and ignoring the kids - I don’t agree and I have not observed this in the last few months. I do see moms on the phone or talking to their friends when the kid is screaming for attention.
When I went back to part-time work, I “solved” the problem by finding college-educated (and above) trusted SAHM friends who cared for my kids along with their own — they were willing to accept the wage I could offer because it allowed them to be home with their own children while still earning something. Right now, my friend watches my 2-year-old two days a week, and I watch her child one day a week as a swap and pay her for the other day. I’ve also had good luck with part-time sitters hiring teachers for late afternoons/weekends, as well as graduate students — all of whom have been extremely well-qualified and willing to work for the standard sitter rate (around here it’s $12-15 an hour for one or two children respectively) because a) they like kids, and b) it fits the hours they have available. I’m lucky that my job is extremely flexible, so I have actually altered my schedule to fit the sitters I like!
But these options are unlikely to work for most full-time workers. And frankly I’m not paying for benefits or anything else that I would have to if any of them worked more than a few hours a week for us. It is NOT a sustainable career choice for someone who is a primary wage-earner for their family.
I think this is a clear “common good” area for government intervention and subsidies, that the market will not solve on its own. We manage to pay public school teachers a living wage (though much less than we should be paid given our qualifications and importance, but that’s another story…) — can’t we extend that same bare minimum to teachers of our youngest and most vulnerable citizens?
You haven’t seen much news about state budgets recently, I suppose.
“Am I alone in thinking $50,000 isn’t all that much money for the work involved? Childcare, teaching, and personal assistance?”
I guess it depends on the demands. In any case, it’s 8-6, five days per week–they can only fit so much teaching and assisting into that. Plenty of bi-lingual college grads could do far worse right now.
“was not expected to provide me with one iota of intellectual stimulation or creative play.”
In any case, it doesn’t seem to have stunted your intellectual development.
But aren’t the nannies (can’t bring myself to call them “childcare specialists”) being paid to do what mom would do with the kids? Not to defend the moms who are constantly ignoring their kids, but if it’s OK for mom to take a call at the playground, why is it NOT Ok for the nanny to do the same? And while it’s great that the older, upper-class moms are down on the mats playing with the kids, there is something to be said for just letting the kids play while the moms and nannies get a chance for a few minutes of adult conversation. Every minute with the kids doesn’t have to be a teaching moment.
I pay a housecleaner precisely because she can clean my toilets better than I can - why not extend that to playing on the playground?
Regarding the topic, I agree childcare workers are underpaid. Even here in Massachusetts, but I don’t have a burning need for my infant or toddler to be cared for by someone with an advanced degree in childhood education. My children are in day care and the center director and lead teachers have the degrees and certification, but the rest of the teachers have little or no formal training. Since most of their day involves wiping noses (and bottoms) and refereeing fights over the blue Thomas train, I feel like that is about the right level of academic training. More important to me is that our daycare is filled with warm-hearted, kind women who my children run in and kiss every morning.
If the taxpayer needs to subsidize paid childcare for dual-income parents, then those families who have chosen to have a parent stay home with the children ought to receive equal compensation for their unpaid labor.
Well, extending that all the way out would mean that one ought to never interact with one’s children, as long as the financial resources were available to employ a better playmate, teacher, counselor, coach, friend, moral advisor, vacation sponsor, and so forth. I guess some people still feel that intra-family love, affection, and devotion carry an inherent value beyond what can be measured in education degrees and current labor rates.
Nobody here has a home mortgage above 7%.
Well, I’m not convinced that most housecleaners are “better’ than their clients at cleaning chores — they are simply willing to do unpleasant work relatively cheaply. If all of the housecleaners in your community formed a union and demanded $30 an hour, you and your neighbors would soon develop superb cleaning skills.
But, taking your word here, are you suggesting that you are hiring a nanny because she is “better” than you at caring for your own child?
I have a SAHM friend who tried to buy disability insurance, because with 4 kids, it would be a big financial hit if something happened to her. That particular insurance product doesn’t exist, because of the difficult in valuing the work of the SAHP.
I am not in favor of subsidizing childcare for anyone, but subsidizing it at a school (or day-care) at least provides a tangible service that you can see and evaluate. Subsidizing someone to stay home allows no evaluation of the quality you are getting for your money, and as we all see by reading the news, there are clearly some homes where the best possible outcome for the child is to spend as many waking hours away from the parents as humanly possible.
Our nanny doesn’t make much - I think about 29K/year gross (16.50/hr). We pay her on the books (this is VERY rare, she was the only person we found who was willing to be paid on the books). She plays with the kids and is warmhearted, kind, and affectionate. She is neither smart nor well-educated - I would describe her as lower-class - she never finished HS and uses words like “ain’t”, and is a little bit lazy. But she is really good with our kids, who are little. I think when our youngest goes to kindergarten we will switch to some kind of aftercare, or I will tweak my hours to pick them up after school, etc., but for now it works.
I do often want to stay home with the kids, but I make quite a bit and also carry all the health insurance for our family, so it wouldn’t work economically for me to stay home. I hope that when they are in school I can cut back to half-time or so, enough to keep my hand in but also run the household more effectively than I feel like I’m doing now.
Law of unintended consequences? -
http://www.ncregister.com/images/uploads/duggar_family_photo.png
But I’ll bite.
If government was responsible for daycares, the standards would decrease due to funding. Then you’ll get too many people screaming nothing is good enough for their kids but won’t put out the extra money themselves; they’ll demand higher taxes so someone else pays for the increased benefits for their kids, and the evil cycle continues. If you want it, and have the means to pay for it, then you should put up or shut up.
Unfortunately, it’s the people who need it but can’t afford it who are the true victims, and while there are plenty of people who “need” things because of their own foolishness, not everyone in need is lazy, stupid, or just getting what they deserve. If they don’t have the good fortune to get trustworthy and quality assistance, they are forced to resort to options that can and often have negative repurcussions for their children. I love the daycare we use. It’s a benefit for the employees who work at that senior center with occasional openings to the public (like our family) when there are open slots. So it’s very small, safe, and very well-run. Those women are fantastic, like extended family at this point, and we treat them as such. Again, as a benefit for the employees of the senior center, there are some children there while their parents work the administration or whatever other white-color jobs, but there are also several who are there while their moms are cleaning the various rooms. Those children get the same high quality care as the children from the families paying full fare.
Not everyone has the same opportunities, but instead of being smug about being able to make the “better” decisions and judging others, we should do what we can to *support* others to make the best decisions for themselves. I can’t afford a cleaner after my childcare, etc, but I also won’t judge the family that pays their cleaner more than their childcare because I don’t know the market forces around that family. I despise forcing people into decisions, even under the guise of knowing what is best for them, so I feel that after a point, you have to let people screw up so they can learn for themselves.
You’re an estate lawyer, right?
They seem to have creeped up a bit, but here’s 4.875 vs 4.625 on a 30-year fixed, assuming points.
https://www.navyfederal.org/products-services/loans/mortgage/mortgage-rates.php
The loans that I have seen are about a 1% difference - that is with no points.
Are those bad rates? I haven’t kept up. What options are available to your clients that are not before the general public?
Obviously this is a completely anomalous situation, only made possible by my high-paying job (Even after paying her it was still “worth it” for me to work. Not so much for DH, but that’s a different story.) and our frugal lifestyle. She deserved every penny of it, but later on when I ramped down my hours to spend more time at home and traded off salary accordingly, we couldn’t keep her on at that cost.
Switching to daycare/aftercare has cut our costs more than in half but I worry about what that means our daycare teachers are being paid. In theory, pooling the payments of multiple parents should allow them to be better paid than a nanny, but I’m not sure. I’m uncomfortable with this idea that the most important and challenging job of raising our children is not well compensated while my totally stupid and pointless job in the business world earns so much.
Our clients don’t really care so much about the rates per se, it’s how the deduction matches up with their income. They talk more to their CPAs and financial planners about it than to us.
I do make $90,000 a year which somewhat reflects my years of service, experience and knowledge base. Although, I am still put in the same category as all other childcare directors. The minimum for a teacher assistant where I work is an associate in ECE. At our last NAEYC accreditiation we received 10 out of 10 for rquired criteria and 10+ in 7 additional required criteria for also meeting emerging criteria. this was out of a total of 10. We make it work by writing additional grants and seeking alternative funding sources. We are nonprofit.
Unfortunately for the overall question on how to pay more I am not sure how to answer - if they raise tuition too high parents will drop, plus I don’t know how the business model works really.
I am writing to you about the low subsidy rates that childcare centers receive from the State of Washington. The rates that the State pays are far below the cost to provide quality childcare. Quality childcare in large part is about hiring, and retaining educated early childhood professionals. This means a living wage, health benefits, and retirement. Then there are the added costs of maintaining the facility in a safe and secure manner.
Approximately 77% of my budget goes towards staff compensation; the other 23% goes into operating expenses and maintenance. We charge a tuition rate that covers all of these costs. If the center I run takes one DSHS child we lose over $4000.00 per year per child. There is a HUGE disparity between what the State reimburses and what it TRULY costs us to provide high quality care for each child we serve.
When I do take DSHS there is the added stress of the State not paying in a timely manner, there have been times that the State has been in arrears as much as 3 months. No one else that my center contracts is allowed this typf of egregious financial misconduct.
Historically childcare professionals are low income and underpaid. In my opinion there is a direct dollar and cents correlation between the low subsidy reimbursement, low wages and high turnover when facilities take on very many DSHS students and their families. When early learning programs are rightly funded staff stay, children are happy, well cared for and in my opinion society as a whole is a better place.
Thank you,
Anne F. Kelly, Director Green Lake Preschool & Childcare Center Seattle Washington. Serving children and families since 1985.
Yes, that old idea that “anyone can do it” gets in the way of forward progress. I’ve interviewed infant teachers and directors and many of the directors will tell you that working with infants is some of the hardest work there is in early childhood. The babies can’t tell you what’s wrong with them when they cry, parents (especially first time parents) need a lot of TLC and it is just plain hard work. Yet funding for the teachers in the earliest years is the lowest in education, even though this is when the foundation for children’s language, self-regulation and trust in the world is established.
The majority of infant/toddler teachers are working with no benefits for less than that $9.73/hr figure. And a lot of the training that is out there is not designed to address the specific needs of infant & toddler teachers.
Anon 1:08, what the ECE teachers I know value most from parents is respect and honest communication, appreciation for the hard work teachers are doing. Yes, your child may occasionally get hurt in child care (it happens at home too, right?) but they are overall trying very hard to care for these little ones. Tell them about things that are going on in your child’s life that might influence how their day will go. Don’t send them in sick if you can help it. And most of all, advocate for higher quality care and supports for good ECE programs.
Parents with attitudes & disrespect (toward teachers and children) probably are the ones that make the work hardest.
Frequent lurker wrote: Sorry-but pay relates to demand and supply. Supply is driven by availability of skills. Since we are all of the same race it does not take a lot of skill and training to learn to look after our young-no matter the billion $ child rearing fear mongering industry would have you believe.
So its never going to be a very highly paid occupation because at certain levels of pay hordes of people would be wiling to do it-creating a glut and reducing pay.
Would really rather not have somebody taking care of my child as a hobby and as a way to stay home with their own children.
The research shows that children receiving high-quality early education perform better in school and in life. The payback in providing high-quality early education in low-income areas is, a